Go Free Yourself

One of my colleagues at SAA circulated an interesting article today about “The Ron Paul Evolution.” Written by David McCarthy, Paul’s chief blogger for the Daily Dose, the piece appears in the American Conservative and states that while “the campaign dies down, the movement is just beginning.”

“Ron Paul owns the future,” influential evangelical Doug Wead concluded in an early April post on his personal blog. Wead makes an unlikely Paul enthusiast: his religious background might seem a better fit for Mike Huckabee. And his personal history—as an adviser to both Presidents Bush—might have inclined him toward the triumphant establishment candidate, John McCain. But in Ron Paul and the movement that championed him, Wead saw something remarkable: “His is a campaign of ideas. … His army was left unchallenged on the battlefield. Now their ideas have taken root and they will grow.”

Read the whole thing here.

And if you haven’t already heard about it, check out the plans for the Revolution March on D.C. July 12.

Who wants to go?!

Ron Paul supporters are all riled up with nowhere to go.

McCain has clinched the presumptive Republican nomination. Ron Paul was unable to get 10 percent in the Republican primary. And now, McCain and the Republican Party are giving Ron Paul supporters the cold shoulder.

The Washington Times reports:

“I don’t think they want them,” Mr. Paul told The Washington Times, adding that indifference doesn’t surprise him because the party’s establishment has deserted traditional conservative principles for big government and foreign intervention.

“We don’t agree with them,” he says. “We agree with the Old Right, and they’re the New Right, which is ‘The Wrong,’ [because] the New Right has morphed into neoconservative.”

This is true. There’s not much common ground here, but the loss is the party’s.

Many of his 800,000 presidential nomination votes were from newcomers to the Republican Party — the kind of dedicated small-donor volunteers the party needs, he says.

Oh well. We didn’t want to be part of your party anyway.

I remember once when I was younger, during Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign, my parents came home from voting and I asked who they voted for. My mom replied that voting was a very private matter and I wasn’t supposed to ask questions like that. I felt quite chastised until I realized a few years later that she only said that because she was embarrassed, as a Republican, about voting for He Clinton.

Today, most people (particularly young people) don’t have this same kind of allegiance to a party. However, allegiance to principles still exists; I was reminded of this today during a discussion about the presidential campaign.

You see, my husband, the devoted libertarian and Ron Paul supporter, has a bit of a man crush on Obama. While he doesn’t agree with a lot of his policies (Obama’s no libertarian, that’s for sure), he admires that Obama represents a new kind of politics. Between the Same Old Failed Republicans (McCain) and the Same Old Failed Democrats (Clinton), he represents—for lack of better word—that change everyone is so crazy about. He calls for working together across the aisle to solve America’s problems, he’s a good listener, and he’s a true leader. So, for these reasons (and more, summed up by Cass R. Sunstein’s Chicago Sun Times commentary), my hubby has given up the dream of a Ron Paul ticket and switched sides. His vote is for Obama.

We have several friends, however, who would not vote for Obama if they were paid to do so. They agree he’s a good man with the ability to move people. They might even agree that he is, more or less, the lesser of three evils. But on principle, they’ll vote their liberty-oriented conscience, writing in Ron Paul or maybe even themselves—anyone who is dedicated to limited government and freedom.

As for me, I haven’t decided yet. I dragged my feet supporting Ron Paul because I knew that as soon as I did, I’d be too invested in hoping he could actually win, could actually make a difference—when I knew the reality was he didn’t have a chance. Ron Paul is the only candidate I really believe in, but writing him in seems like a pointless exercise. (Although it would be interesting to see how much of his tremendous grassroots support would write him in.) Obama is undoubtedly the best option of the three, but voting for a big government guy (no matter how charming or pragmatic) still feels wrong.

So what do we do? As libertarians, do we vote our conscience, come hell or high water? Or do we “make our vote count” by ignoring policy differences and picking the candidate we think can win and do the least amount of damage?

I’d love to hear your thoughts…who are YOU voting for?